Several Connecticut newspapers issued testimony today in support of HB 5408, a bill that would stipulate that state agencies devote 50 percent of their advertising budgets towards contracts with print or online publications based in the State of Connecticut. 

“Local reporting and local news outlets are a cornerstone of democracy as we have long known it,” testified Bernard Kavaler, the managing editor of Connecticut by the Numbers. “This bill is a creative solution that will contribute to sustaining local journalism, and its civic benefits.”

The bill, proposed by Rep. Kate Farrar, D-West Hartford, wrote in testimony that the bill would support local journalism in an era that is seeing more and more local news sources close or bought up by national “hedge funds and media conglomerates who pursue cost cutting measures – leading to coverage that is more national, less diverse and, in some cases, more politically polarized.”

The most notable exception of the bill is that it would only apply to publications with Connecticut-based publishers, meaning that papers owned by large media conglomerates would not be applicable. 

“Passage of the legislation would put Connecticut-owned media outlets on the field of play for an appropriate share of the allocation of advertising dollars – a role that, in my view, these media outlets have earned and deserve,” said Kavaler. 

The bill would only impact state agencies of the executive branch, and advertisement placements geared towards out-of-state tourism, economic development or employee recruitment would not be privy. State agencies could also request the Commissioner of Administrative Services to waive the 50 percent quota if they deem it would hurt the impact or reach of their advertising. The bill is budget neutral; advertising budgets for state agencies affected by the bill will remain the same, only the rules surrounding their allocation would change.

It’s no secret that newsrooms are hurting; just this year alone, VICE News has closed its doors, the Los Angeles Times has laid off 20 percent of its staff, and Sports Illustrated is in the process of laying off the vast majority of its staff. According to a 2022 report done by the Medill Local News Initiative, over 2,500 newspapers have closed doors since 2004, representing over a quarter of the nation’s newsrooms in total. Newspapers’ struggles are primarily a result of reductions in advertising revenue, as online advertising models provide publications with significantly less income than the print ads of the past.

Connecticut is not the first state to try and implement bills to stop the hemorrhaging of newsrooms. The idea to mandate a certain allotment of agencies’ advertising budgets has already been adopted on a municipal level in New York City, Chicago, and San Francisco. State Rep. Kate Farrar (D-West Hartford) mentioned New York and Chicago by name in her testimony in support of the bill, which she said “builds on the work” of the two cities.

States such as California and New Jersey have taken things a step further, passing bills that would directly allocate tax dollars to local newsrooms. Furthermore, states such as New York, Virginia, and Wisconsin have all introduced bills that would provide tax credits for news subscriptions.

The bill is not without its detractors, however; Jeffrey Beckham, Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) submitted written testimony opposing the bill, on the grounds that mandating the use of advertising dollars “does not provide taxpayers with the best value.” He also acknowledged the waiver process built into the bill as “yet another administrative burden on state agencies.”

Beckham states that he “appreciates the valuable and important work performed by our local media” and would be open to finding other methods to support the industry. His objection is based purely on the grounds of fiscal efficiency. Beckham said that the bill should get rid of the strict 50 percent quota, replacing it instead with a preference for in-state outlets.

“Sometimes the most effective approach is to advertise with local news publishers, sometimes it is more effective to advertise with national media outlets,” said Beckham. “To receive the best value, the state agency must have the discretion to advertise on platforms that best reach its target audience.”

Randall Compton, a resident of Fairfield, CT and a digital advertising executive with over 20 years experience, pushed back against this concern in his own written testimony. 

“While it may require a bit more planning to use/access smaller outlets, the aggregate reach would still be the same as it will fully cover the population of our state and the 50 percent threshold means that existing buys can still continue,” said Compton. “Many smaller outlets may have less reach but more authority for readers and viewers of advertising.”

Bruce Putterman, CEO and publisher of the CT Mirror, a nonprofit that would be eligible for state advertising dollars under this bill, also addressed the argument in his own written testimony in support of the bill.

“​​You may hear a concern that this bill will dilute the effectiveness of state advertising dollars,” said Putterman. “I would argue just the opposite, that allocating the bulk of state print and digital advertising to news organizations that impose a paywall impedes the state’s ability to reach the vast majority of residents who can’t afford or choose not to pay subscription fees.”

If passed, state agencies would have to begin following the 50 percent quota on January 1, 2025. It would be the job of the Commissioner of Administrative Services to set guidelines for agencies’ advertising contracts and is allowed to accept “volunteer assistance” from universities or other neutral third parties with relevant experience in implementing similar measures.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.